Discussion BBL|10 SC: Team & In-Game Discussion - Home of #1 and #2 Leagues
- Thread starter Goodie's Guns
- Start date
Thanks Professor - appreciate you helping out the twitter illiterate (myself included).
Some interesting ideas coming up but I feel like a lot of the "would likes" are kind of steering the scoring system away from an AFL fantasy style of action = points and more towards a true Supercoach style of impact = points (which I don't disagree with, but not sure the functionality would exist for that to work).
My 2 cents...
- it feels like batsman shouldn't necessarily need to hit milestones for score bonuses (SR, 50 runs, 100 runs, etc) as they effectively only get the one chance to have an impact with the bat. My preference would be for the SR bonus to be a simple multiplier against their score - for example instead of 25 points for scoring 20+ runs and having a SR of 160+, I would prefer it to be flipped and say if you have a SR of 160, you get 1.6x your runs.. maybe capped at a 200 SR being 2.0? I haven't completely thought through all of the implications of this but so often a player comes in late, hits 16 off 4 balls, and gets 16 points, where as that feels like unders given the impacts they've had (note: multiplier doesn't need to be this high depending on my next point)
- runs feel criminally undervalued. A batsman who comes in after the team is 3/20 and hits a solid 40 off 40 to help rebuild the innings gets less than a player that hits a quick 20 and goes out. I know that flies in the face of my 16 off 4 comment above, but there has to be some way to help a batsman get value for runs.
- this one may be a little unusual, but I'd actually like to see the ER bonus split out per over. If a player bowls a tidy over they deserve something, but they also shouldn't necessarily be punished if the 3rd over goes large. Or as an alternative, maybe increasing the value of a dot ball to 2 could achieve a similar result.
- I have no idea how this would work, but possibly a way to create parity in total scores of patches? Similar to the 3300 in AFL SC, however not sure that's entirely possible in an action = points style of game.
- the ability to permanently delete your team into oblivion when you hit that moment when you just can't handle the crushing lows any more...
Anyway sorry this ended up bigger than expected so feel free to paraphrase and/or skip posting this one on - just found the overall topic quite interesting!
Some interesting ideas coming up but I feel like a lot of the "would likes" are kind of steering the scoring system away from an AFL fantasy style of action = points and more towards a true Supercoach style of impact = points (which I don't disagree with, but not sure the functionality would exist for that to work).
My 2 cents...
- it feels like batsman shouldn't necessarily need to hit milestones for score bonuses (SR, 50 runs, 100 runs, etc) as they effectively only get the one chance to have an impact with the bat. My preference would be for the SR bonus to be a simple multiplier against their score - for example instead of 25 points for scoring 20+ runs and having a SR of 160+, I would prefer it to be flipped and say if you have a SR of 160, you get 1.6x your runs.. maybe capped at a 200 SR being 2.0? I haven't completely thought through all of the implications of this but so often a player comes in late, hits 16 off 4 balls, and gets 16 points, where as that feels like unders given the impacts they've had (note: multiplier doesn't need to be this high depending on my next point)
- runs feel criminally undervalued. A batsman who comes in after the team is 3/20 and hits a solid 40 off 40 to help rebuild the innings gets less than a player that hits a quick 20 and goes out. I know that flies in the face of my 16 off 4 comment above, but there has to be some way to help a batsman get value for runs.
- this one may be a little unusual, but I'd actually like to see the ER bonus split out per over. If a player bowls a tidy over they deserve something, but they also shouldn't necessarily be punished if the 3rd over goes large. Or as an alternative, maybe increasing the value of a dot ball to 2 could achieve a similar result.
- I have no idea how this would work, but possibly a way to create parity in total scores of patches? Similar to the 3300 in AFL SC, however not sure that's entirely possible in an action = points style of game.
- the ability to permanently delete your team into oblivion when you hit that moment when you just can't handle the crushing lows any more...
Anyway sorry this ended up bigger than expected so feel free to paraphrase and/or skip posting this one on - just found the overall topic quite interesting!
As a additional bonus ?
For some reason I have in my head it is a lot easier for a bowler to score 40 points in a game than a batsman (no stats whatsoever to back this up).
Seems even when Carey ,& Hales scored a 💯 that they were still "underscored" somehow , don't know if anyone posted what they would have scored under the "old" system.
I don't mind a "impact" system but how do you measure it.
A bowler takes a luck 3fa and is 70+ where as you might bowl 4-0-16-0 and you are only 25 + dot balls.
For some reason I have in my head it is a lot easier for a bowler to score 40 points in a game than a batsman (no stats whatsoever to back this up).
Seems even when Carey ,& Hales scored a 💯 that they were still "underscored" somehow , don't know if anyone posted what they would have scored under the "old" system.
I don't mind a "impact" system but how do you measure it.
A bowler takes a luck 3fa and is 70+ where as you might bowl 4-0-16-0 and you are only 25 + dot balls.
All rules will be an issue in rain shortened games.. although that said, the fact that points count in shortened games is super rough. A DNP would be fairer for games where there is 10 overs or less in either inning (or something along those lines). There will be no way to make the points fair, but the price implications of rained impacted games is huge.. both in losing value for players you own, and other people being able to bring those players in far cheaper.
I like the simplicity of where a run , wicket , catch , stumping , run out actually gets rewarded.
I guess the difficult part is then trying to have a balance between bat and ball so it is equalised.
I guess with SR , ER , milestones you are then rewarding the player who achieves these with bonus points.
Maybe man of the match gets say 25 bonus points.
I do like the idea of "points for impact" 2 wickets in the Power Play , a quick 20-30 down the order , a lone hand keeping your team in it etc etc but think it would be to hard to measure and actually cause too much confusion from game to game.
Batting 1st and chasing requires a completely different mindset as well.
I guess they need to look at their participants , the majority might "enjoy" a less complex scoring system.
Could get very complicated
I guess the difficult part is then trying to have a balance between bat and ball so it is equalised.
I guess with SR , ER , milestones you are then rewarding the player who achieves these with bonus points.
Maybe man of the match gets say 25 bonus points.
I do like the idea of "points for impact" 2 wickets in the Power Play , a quick 20-30 down the order , a lone hand keeping your team in it etc etc but think it would be to hard to measure and actually cause too much confusion from game to game.
Batting 1st and chasing requires a completely different mindset as well.
I guess they need to look at their participants , the majority might "enjoy" a less complex scoring system.
Could get very complicated
I think the problem with that is that the problem we're trying to solve is that wickets are already over-valued. What would make more sense in that context is that each wicket is worth 20, and the bowler gets the full 20 if he does all the work himself (bowled, LBW, C&B) and 15 if it's caught by someone else (or stumped).